A thought on pedantry and flexibility in magic of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay

Listening to the darn wonderful WFRP 4th edition season 3 podcast by Mud and Blood I was struck by how similar the reading of the Open Lock spell was in their interpretation of the rules. Damn strict. In the last season in episode 27 the Gold Wizard botches a spell and finds himself floating 9 or so yards up in the air trying to get in a latched window while an enemy is about to use him for target practice. In a prior IRL game the Open Lock spell struck me as borderline pointless given how restrictive it is, how expensive spells are; and I think there is a better way to handle spells so they are both slightly more useful and dangerous.

Open Lock is a Petty spell which says “one non-magical lock you touch opens”. The strict pedantic reading of the spell does not allow for latches, switches, bits of wood or any other mechanism which might be used to keep a door, chest, or window closed, and also doesn’t allow for locking of a targeted item, or doing so at arms reach. What if there was a way to keep the very strict reading of the spells as a base, and add flexibility should the Wizard choose to take additional risks?

Appreciate the view that the “magic” which the Empire of Man has access to was designed as restricted and highly prescribed – because paraphrasing the Elf lore – humans are such weak creatures as to be too risky to learn high magicks. Thus a Petty spell like this is reasonably limited, and all magic is closely defined.

But then also consider that magick within the setting is a language which contorts the world to the casters will, and as such is endlessly varied and deep. In my view magic as taught to humans is a starting point and as the Wizards skill in Language Magic increases the wizards learns new words, new subtleties, contexts, abbreviations, and alternatives which make their spell casting better. Like the cliche of there being 13x different words for snow, I like the view that “magick” has such tonal and linguistic depth that it is plausible for a Wizard to try to substitute a tone or phrase to get a slightly different result.

My suggestion is that a Wizard may opt to use Quavering in their spell casting, which is a way to slightly change a spell to perform somewhat differently, although must still be sympathetic the remit of the spells intended purpose.

Quavering – The caster may alter slightly the way a spell is used, thereby gaining some flexibility or benefit; at a cost of removing any typical protections they often may gain from Talents which limit miscasts, and must test for a miscast.

When doing so the Wizard chooses to accept any and all wild surges of magic for the benefit of tweaking their spells effects. If the alteration is relatively small the CN to cast increases by 1 and a minor miscast is applied. If the spell is changed in a more major way the CN is increased by 2 and a major miscast is applied. This is in addition to any miscast result which might apply from the spell casting itself, and Quavering must be declared before the spell casting roll is made.

Introducing flexibility adds more complexity into magic which sometimes slows games. Some changes might be ruled as too much of a change and it’s important to refer back to the purpose of the spell and the thematic examples and styles of spells to adjudicate on what is reasonable to allow.

Eg. This option might allow a wizard to close a lock (using magic on the same type of thing, using it in a manner sympathetic to the devices purpose, but in the reverse manner – meaning a small change). Or flipping open a latch rather than a lock; or casting the spell on the lock within a pace or away rather than touch – also small changes. Perhaps doing a few of those – like targeting a window latch from outside the window from the episode of Mud and Blood – that’s a moderate (2CN) change.

There should be a line for adjudicating what is possible, and what is just beyond moderate change which can’t be varied within the spell as structured.

Examples of Quavering:

• Making a circular area of affect spell into a rectangle or square (minor)
• Making an area of effect an odd but still contiguous shape, such as a right angle or sliding some of the AoE around a corner (moderate)
• Excluding a person from being affected by the AoE within its normal share (major = not allowed).
• Changing a spell from touch to within 1-2 paces (minor)
• Changing a touch spell to WPB Yards (moderate)

An outstanding blog post about weapons and fighting styles in WFRP 4, and Bastard Swords

Warhammer Fantasy has a complex, logical, and deep set of combat mechanics which is easy to understand when used at the early stages of a character’s career and gets wonderfully deep and powerful if explored properly. Some folk hate that, but in my view it’s great as it better reflects the flavour of the fighting styles of the time without getting into simulationist arguments.

Recently thinking about options for a Duellist and reading the changes and options presented when Up In Arms is used along side the WFRP core rules – I went into a delve for rule clarifications – and came across this blog post by FaithFictionFatherhood.com which is an excellent exploration of many options.

A particularly good area is the suggestion to rename the Bastard Sword in the weapon table to Longsword, and add a new weapon which is truly what we might call a bastard sword – a mid range sized blade with a long handle. My limited experience with Longswords in HEMA supports this change; and I can understand what type of weapon is being described when Bastard sword is written, a look which might have started as a mutt of an Arming sword which is very light, with a longer pommel, and probably has defensive rings on the cross.

Bastard Sword: this complex weapon is weighted specifically so it may be used as either a one handed or two handed manner, allowing for a degree of flexibility and also often has further details such as defensive rings to enhance its utility.

• Bastard Sword (2H): SB+4, Range: Average, Qualities: Defensive, Fast.
• Bastard Sword (1H): SB+4, Range: Average.

Suggestions for cost and availability rating should be in line with other two handed weapons: when in double use the cost etc of the original Bastard Sword.